Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 12/14/1987DORSET STREET WIDENING NECESSITY HEARING 12/14/87 The City of South Burlington held a Necessity Hearing on the Dorset Street Widening Project on Monday, 14 December 1987, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Those Present Michael Flaherty, Acting Chairman; Francis X. Murray, George Mona, Molly Lambert, City Council; William Szymanski, City Manager; Steven Stitzel, City Attorney; Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator; James Goddette, Fire Chief; Michael Munson, Project Coordinator; Robert Murphy, Robert Shattuck, Larry Willey, Lyn Alden, Larry Bliss Agency of Transportation; Frederick Tuttle, S. Burlington Superintendent of Schools; Mary-Barbara Maher, Planning Commission; Albert Audette, S. Burlington Street Department; Ruth Poger, The Other Paper; Mike Donoghue, Free Press; Nancy Munson, Charles Munson, Christopher Bishop, Charles DesLauriers, Tony Cairns, Howard Porter, James Knapp, Samuel Shearer, Marsha Smith Meekins, Joan Perry, Judith Bailey, Mary Perry, Doris Bailey, Pauline Piche, Ken Kirby, Ken Wales, Samantha Wales, Charles Finberg, Hubert Norton, Lawrence Abbiata, Eugene Shlatz, John Fitzhugh, Bernard & Johanna McKenna, Benjamin Schweyer, Earl Greer, Ann Flint-Chevrier, R. W. Posey, E. A. Welch, Ralph Veve, Maurice Paquette, Bob Smith, Steve Whittelsey. Mr. Flaherty read the Public Notice of the Hearing and also the definition of "necessity" from the Vermont Statute. He then asked that those who wished to give testimony in the hearing identify themselves and be sworn in. Mike Munson, Project Coordinator, outlined the major features of the project which will run from 400 feet south of Kennedy Drive north through the Williston Road intersection, for a total of 6400 feet. The project is designed to be an integral part of the city with three major considerations: civil design, traffic flow, and safety. There is also a major concern for access management. Civic design: Dorset Street is the principal street in the city, and the city has been exploring a "city center, concept around this street. It serves a major shopping center, several smaller shopping centers, the High School, Middle School, City Hall, etc. The proposed design is intended to reinforce the role of the street. It will be a tree-lined boulevard for its entire length with street trees as well. Traffic Capacity/Reduction of Congestion: The street is currently functioning with a lot of congestion and many turning movements. The project is designed to relieve a deficiency in this area. Current road capacity has not kept up with development, and even more development is planned. Dorset St is not considered a "through street"; people who use it are usually going to a destination on Dorset St. There is no alternative for the road. Traffic will be a function of what happens along Dorset Street. The project has been in the planning process for a number of years. Steps involved in that process include: 1. Determination of current status: it is a 2-lane road, 24 feet of pavement which widens to a third, then fourth lane above the southern entrance to University Mall. There are high levels of congestion. 2. Estimate of traffic using the road in 1987: many of the intersections are functioning at level of service "E", including the Kennedy Drive and Williston Rd. intersections. Expansion is needed to accommodate existing and projected traffic. 3. Develop forecasts of traffic levels: Two increments of growth were considered: projects with approvals pending (including the University Mall expansion, the build out of Corporate Circle) and traffic projected from parcels of land for which projects have not yet been approved. Data used was collected from the permanent counting station, and this yielded a growth figure of 1.58. Every parcel of land on Dorset St. was looked at from the point of view of future development. This yielded a growth figure of 50% It was decided to use 58% as a conservative figure. 4. Build in anticipated changes in the roads: The link from Corporate Circle to Hinesburg Rd. was considered, also a connection from Corporate Way through the Midas road. A diversion model was used to allocate traffic to these routes. 5. Use that information to design road: A 4-lane road was designed with an additional free right turn lane into the University Mall. There are also left turns built into the median. There is a limited left turn capability to control access. The median becomes a portion of the accesss management design and allows left turning traffic to be out of the through traffic lanes. To check on the design, a level of service analysis was done at various intersections. All rated "C" or "B" except Williston Road and Kennedy Drive which would still be at "E" and "F". This project will not improve either Kennedy Drive or Williston Rd. Additional work will be necessary at those locations in the future. The project was therefore recommended from both the existing and projected development points of view. Access Management: One of the reasons the road could attain "B" and "C" levels of service is the limited access concept which restricts the places where vehicles can turn on and off the road. Signals have been provided at those locations, including: Chittenden Bank/100 Dorset Street, University Mall/Corporate Way, University Mall/Lake Buick, 2 locations of San Remo Drive, Town Square, Middle School, City Hall, High School, Howard Johnsons. The grass median will be replaced with a painted median in front of the fire station to allow full access for the Fire Department. Safety: Accident experience records for 1981-1985 cite failure to yield, inattention, and following too close as the 3 most frequent causes of accidents. The most frequent kinds of accidents are: turning in the opposite direction, rear enders, right angle broadside, and turning in the same direction. A major cause of the number of accidents is the many points where these types of actions can occur. If the number of danger points can be reduced, the accident potential can also be reduced. Safety was also considered from the point of view of bicyclists and pedestrians. A sidewalk and bike path is provided on both sides of the road and are separated from the road by a planted green strip. There are also a number of pedestrian activated "walk" signals. Property Required: The property required is about equal on both sides of the road at a depth ranging from 10 ft. to about 25 ft. The right-of-way line will be straight, correcting the present situation. Approximately 207,000 sq. ft. is required and about 9/10 of an acre is already owned by the city. This means some land will be taken off the tax rolls. The loss of 3.6 acres is, however, considered small when future development is contemplated. In summation, Mr. Munson said, the road is designed to accommodate existing and projected traffic. Safety and aesthetic considerations justify the median, and safety and development on both sides of the road justify the bicycle/pedestrian paths on both sides. The planting strip is justified by safety and aesthetic considerations. The design has a number of aspects that minimize impact on owners: land taken is split on both sides, no structures are taken, there is a minimal taking of vegetative screening, additional trees will be planted, where possible construction of revised access on individual parcels of land is included. The audience was then invited to ask questions and comment on the proposed project. Mr. Brown asked if a left turn is provided into Dorset Square Mall and Mr. Munson said it was. Chuck Munson asked if there had been any study about internal configurations for parking. They lost 11 parking spaces, for example. Mike Munson said they have met with individual owners and concept sketches are being worked out. C. Munson noted his canopy is being taken. M. Munson noted the canopy already extends into the right-of-way. C. Munson also questioned the free flowing right turn for University Mall, noting that this will "condemn" traffic exiting Howard Johnsons. M. Munson said he felt there will be gaps in the traffic. Mr. Smith, lessee of Howard Johnsons, said he felt it was a public safety hazard not to allow for a window of escape from Howard Johnsons onto Dorset St. He said the safety of their guests was at stake. David Berteau, a small property owner, felt they were not getting an equal amount of attention as the large owners. Earl Greer was concerned that 27 feet of his property had been taken over the past years, and was afraid after condemnation that no one would have a say in how the road was built. He said he had not seen anything that would get traffic in and out of Howard Johnsons and Greers Laundry Center. Mr. Brown said he had spoken to the State about a light in front of Dorset Square. This light was part of the Planning Commission's approval and they are concerned their access will become like 100 Dorset St. is now where you can't get in or out. James Knapp, representing Champlain Oil, asked on what basis consolidation of driveways was made. He said they are 2 separate lots and have only 1 access. Mr. Munson said the lots are owned by the same owner and there is also an approved site plan. Mr. Knapp said the plan is not approved and is going to court. He stressed these are 2 separate lots. Ralph Veve of Dorset Commons said they have 11 buildings, 106 apartments with lots of traffic. The access planned for them is the same as for the police station, and he felt this would create a lot of traffic behind City Hall and would be a safety nightmare inside the development. He felt if the entrance could be moved to line up with the High School/Middle School access, it would be better for everyone. Mr. Munson said it looked feasible and he would continue to work on it. John Fitzhugh, attorney for Green Mountain Power, said they have no objection to the taking of land near the sub-station. He said GMP did object to putting utilities underground at their expense. Mr. Flaherty said that consideration was not a part of this hearing. Mr. Fitzhugh asked if provision had been made for putting utilities above ground. Mr. Munson said both contingencies have been provided for. A representative of the Anchorage asked where signage could be placed as they are planning to put up a sign. Mr. Munson said signage would be 20-25 feet back from the street. Mr. Greer questioned the necessity of the bike path. Mrs. Lambert noted that there will be a good deal of bike use on the street, especially since the major city park is planned for the other end of Dorset St. Mr. Finberg of New England Telephone asked why they had gotten notice to attend. Mr. Munson said records show they own an easement that would have to be condemned. He will discuss this further with N.E. Telephone. Ms. Meekins asked the same question on behalf of Green Mountain Power. Mr. Stitzel said it appears GMP owns parcel #50. This will also be further looked into. Mr. DesLauriers, owner of the parcel at 421 Dorset St, said they discussed incorporating a curb cut consistent with the master plan and their planned development at that location. Mr. Munson had said it would be included in the design, and Mr. Deslauriers asked that it be constructed with the road. Mr. Munson said the curb cut would be opposite San Remo Dr. Mrs. Maher asked if there would be a delay in construction because of changes such as proposed tonight. Mr. Munson didn't feel this would delay acquisition of property. Mr. Whittlesey noted the width of the road depended on the amount of traffic and on the bike path. He didn't feel the bike path was necessary as there isn't a lot of bike traffic. He said he also couldn't imagine traffic worse than what is going on at University Mall right now. Mr. Munson said the road is designed based on future build out to a full traffic status. Mr. Greer asked if there was any work to be done on providing more lanes onto 1-189. Mr. Flaherty noted there is discussion taking place on that possibility and also the possiblity of a Hinesburg Rd. 1-89 Interchange. Mr. Bishop of Chittenden Bank said they will need internal configuration changes and asked where the money for this comes from. Mr. Flaherty said that is not at issue at this hearing. Mr. Veve asked about saving trees. Mr. Munson said they are very concerned with this. He has walked many parcels and identified trees to be saved. Mr. Reynolds of Brookwood Drive asked about the natural treed fence line between his property and the next. Mr. Munson said on land being taken, trees will be compensated for. He did not know the procedure for trees taken or damaged by accident. Mr. Ross said he felt the road was a good idea and he supported it. Mr. Cairns said he felt the road was needed but felt things such as shared driveways and the bike path on both sides of the street should be reconsidered. Ms. Perry of 321 Dorset St. felt curb cuts cater to larger businesses and asked if there would be zoning changes because of the project. Mr. Flaherty noted this is still in the development stage. Mr. Berteau said he had lived on Dorset St. for 28 years and could remember when one could bicycle there safely. He felt the city would regret it if they did not put the bike path on both sides of the street. He stressed there are 2 schools at the end of the street. Mr. Flaherty noted the plan is to continue the bike path all the way to the new city park. Mr. Smith stressed that the city must recognize that action taken has many ramifications. Following the discussion, the date and time for the site visit was set at Saturday, 9 January, at 10 AM. Property owners were invited to meet with Council members at their property locations at that time. Mr. Murray then moved that the hearing be recessed until 9 January 1988. Mrs. Lambert seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.